AI Assistant
Notifications
Clear all

Future Development on Plat is overstated

11 Posts
9 Users
0 Reactions
983 Views
johnlpurchase
(@johnlpurchase)
Posts: 2
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I am being taxed by my COunty for land labeled as"Future DFevelopment" on my Plat. THe COunty correctly used the acreage listed on the plat however the land is not all future development. We are an approved subdivision with the Development plan (site plan) filed with the County Recorder. If the Assessor had reviewed the plan they would have seen that the surveyor included alot of the land between and around the building envelopes (i.e. common areas) and collectively labelled on the plat as "future development". I estimate that true future development per approved site plan is about 1/3 of what was used in assessing my taxes and therefore I am paying way to much in taxes. Assessors office is arguing that they can only go by the plat and I am arguing that because this is a subdivision, more care should have been taken in determining what was labelled as future development and at the least they should have caught this and asked for more information. While I am hoping they would be able to estimate true future development by estimating approx building envelopes, I am thinking they will require more info, i.e. an amended plat that lists true future development parcel sizes exactly.

This is my problem, I have been told that in order to do this plat surveyor would need to survey all interior boundaries and there are well over a 100 monuments. THis is a very colstly proposoition, especially given that all infrastructure is in place and it is pretty obvious that the roads are where they should be (they have been surveyed on previous plats) so it seems like this is overkill?

Any thoughts, suggestions anyone?


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 11:11 am
Dave Ingram
(@dave-ingram)
Posts: 2140
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

My heart pumps Kool-Aid for you

Most developers do NOT want something called open space because once it is labeled as such you can never do anything with it. So they label the unused space as "Future Development" or "Possible Future Development" so that they have options if a profitable scheme appears in the future.

Your one avenue of hope would be if the jurisdiction required certain percentages of "open space" at the time of platting and you might be able to fall back on that.


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 12:06 pm
johnlpurchase
(@johnlpurchase)
Posts: 2
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

My heart pumps Kool-Aid for you

Thanks for your reply Dave,

I understand what you are saying and will look into the open space requirements.

Do you know if it is a requirement that my Surveyor would need to survey all internal boundaries (there are over 100 existing monuments) if we did an amended plat or could we just survey 4 corners of the true future development pods and superimpose onto the existing plat. After all the internal boundaries (roads, asphalt etc are all installed and have not moved)??

Thanks,
JOhn


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 12:16 pm
cptdent
(@cptdent)
Posts: 2082
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

My heart pumps Kool-Aid for you

Check the Minimum Technical Standards for Surveying in your state. If that document says you have to locate all the corners, then your surveyor has no option.


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 1:01 pm
foggyidea
(@foggyidea)
Posts: 3462
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

The taxes may be calculated on the ability to subdivide and may count the number of potential lots, not just individual lot areas.

As it should be unless you have an agriculture waiver.

But I am a little confused, all the bounds are in and the roads are in, but the lots are not available to sell yet?


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 1:10 pm

jud
 jud
(@jud)
Posts: 1918
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

My heart pumps Kool-Aid for you

Why are you asking here the questions your Licensed Surveyor should be answering? Or is he not qualified, or unable to answer them. A bit strange asking for local answers on a national board.
jud


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 1:12 pm
Pin Cushion
(@pin-cushion)
Posts: 475
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I suggest....

Disclosing your location as to get some real answers... Otherwise people will continue offering useless info.


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 1:13 pm
Kris Morgan
(@kris-morgan)
Posts: 3855
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

You must be from Texas. Here is how this goes in the Great State of Tejas. Assume you have an ag-exemption on your land, then you divide only a small part of it, but the surveyor places "Reserved for future Development". To the assessor, that means that you've changed the use on the WHOLE thing, thereby changing your effective tax rate, and in Texas, when you do that, they can roll back five years on the taxes as well.

It is for the above reason, I no longer put "Reserved for Future Development" on ANY subdivision plat I prepare, regardless of whether or not I know phase II is in the works or not.

Good luck amigo!


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 1:22 pm
Perry Williams
(@perry-williams)
Posts: 2183
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I can't see why you would have to tie into EVERY monument simply to map the common areas. You would just locate enough monument to verify that you are on the same coordinate system.


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 1:50 pm
Andy Nold
(@andy-nold)
Posts: 2022
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I think it would be up to the surveyor who you engage to do the work to determine the amount of work necessary. Find someone who is willing to work with you and if you think that they are proposing more work than necessary, ask him to explain his proposal and what he thinks is needed to do the job. If you don't like his answer or he refuses to discuss his approach, find another surveyor and start the process again.

Please do not approach a surveyor based on information gleaned from the internet from people who have no idea what your local requirements are and try to dictate his price. Requirements vary by state and locale, so what might fly in Tishaminga, Texas might not work in New York, New York.

My 2¢.


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 1:59 pm

Perry Williams
(@perry-williams)
Posts: 2183
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Good advce ANdy

Here in NH, the land owner would simply make a sketch of the undeveloped land (10 acres min) and enroll it into the Current Use Program where it would be taxed at a tiny fraction of the going rate. You would pay a 10% penalty if you take it back out of the program (to develop it)


 
Posted : May 23, 2012 2:21 pm